I try not to be judgmental about pro se litigants (I myself am one and I am proud of it), but it is going to be very difficult to give OP any guidance when (1) just the list of defendants contains two or more glaring mistakes, and (2) he doesn't even answer Marcie's questions.

If he files an appeal in the Sixth Circuit, he will need to be much more proficient and careful in his briefing than how I presume he "has been" in the lower court.

You assert that the Academy's (and presumably also SOA's) expulsion of you is "ludicrously false."

The notice to members indicates that the expulsion was for a violation of Precept 1, and they specifically cite annotation 1-4. The violation apparently stems from inappropriate emails they say you sent that were of a harassing/threatening nature, and that you continued to send even after a court order to stop.

So which part(s) of the Academy's account is/are false?

Did you not send the emails?

Do you deny the nature of the emails?

Was the court order fictitious?

Do you dispute that sending a series of inappropriate emails and/or disobeying a direct court order could represent a violation of Precept 1 of the Code of Professional Conduct?

Thank you,
Marcie

Don't forget 5. He may believe it is not a material violation

__________________

Spoiler:

* * * * * *
"No one remembers 5K and I wrote a nice poem for the occassion. No one remember's 10k. No one will remember 20k either." - Sir Post-A-Lot

"One of the ordinary modes, by which tyrants accomplish their purposes without resistance, is, by disarming the people, and making it an offense to keep arms."
-- Constitutional scholar and Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, 1840

"The problem with socialism is you eventually run out of other peoples' money." -- Margaret Thatcher

"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." -- George Washington